Hayes Township Budget Meetings

I’d like to draw the Reader’s attention to the Hayes Township Budget approved on 30 Jun 2011.

There are some things that occurred with regard to the budget of which most good citizens of Hayes Township were/are unaware. Even many who were paying attention missed it, and they were at the meeting when it occurred!

On 9 Jun 2011, there was a notice of a public hearing published in the Clare County Cleaver, set for 21 Jun 2011 at 7 PM. As required by the state law, the following statement was part of the announcement:
The property tax millage rate proposed to be levied to support the proposeed budget will be a subject of this hearing.

The notice also stated that a copy of the budget would be available for viewing in the Clerk’s Office during regular office hours. (It is required by state law that the notice also contain information about where the budget may be viewed by the general public prior to the Public Hearing. A Budget Public Hearing is also required by state law.)

Here is what very few people knew: The budget was, in fact, not available for the public to view in the days leading up to the Public Hearing because the Treasurer had not received all the input required from the Clerk and the Supervisor. The budget was also not available for the public to view on the night of the Public Hearing.

Yet, according to the minutes of the regular meeting of the Hayes Township Board of Trustees, which was also held on 21 Jun 2011, the “Public Hearing” was held anyway. Did you miss it? So did many people who attended the meeting. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 7:04 PM, and after the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call, the Regular Meeting was closed and the “Public Hearing” was opened. There being no questions or comments, the Budget Public Hearing was closed and the Regular Meeting was re-opened at 7:05 PM.

Are you kidding me? A less than one minute “Public Hearing”? Really? How is anyone supposed to have questions or comments when they have not had an opportunity to see the budget because it was not complete before the meeting? Is this transparent government? Because of the way the minutes read, the bases are covered if anyone wants to look into it. The minutes do reflect, after all that there was a public hearing. It’s just that nobody had any questions. They omit the fact that the budget was still, as of that "Public Hearing," not available for the public to review. And most people didn’t realize that a “Public Hearing” was held right under their noses.

No action was taken on the budget, presumably because the budget was not yet ready. Common sense would tell you that there would have to be a follow-up Special Meeting specifically for the purpose of passing the budget.

There is no record in the minutes of when that follow-up meeting was to be held, but it had to be before 30 Jun 2011. The new fiscal year was to begin on 1 July 2011.

The Special Meeting to approve the budget was announced late in the afternoon of 29 Jun 2011 to be held at 10 AM on the 30 Jun 2011. As late as the afternoon of 29 Jun 2011, the budget was still not available for the public to view. People did go in to ask to see it.

Finally, on the day of the vote, there was a single copy of the budget in Supervisor Scherrer’s possession at the meeting. The budget and amendments were passed at that meeting, without the benefit of a true public hearing.

This is more “business as usual” in the running of Hayes Township.

I was able to procure a copy of the budget form Mr. Breese (Township Clerk) the following week.

There are other issues concerning the Hayes Township Regular meeting on 21 Jun 2011 and the minutes of that meeting.

1. The minutes were misdated. According to the minutes, the meeting was on 14 Jun 2011. The meeting actually took place on 21 Jun 2011

2. The bogus “Budget Public Hearing.”

3. The tax millage rate was not a topic of the “Hearing”.

4. When they approved the minutes of the May 2011 Board of Trustees Regular Meeting,

     a. The date was wrong. The minutes list the meeting as having taken place on 15 May 2011 (a Sunday). The meeting actually took place on 17 May 2011.

     b. There was some question as to whether Don Atkinson of the Planning Commission, when proposing a bike park on Hayes Township property, said in his proposal “minimal cost to the Township” or “no charge”. The solution seems to have been to strike the sentence altogether, (“removing the sentence concerning minimal charge.”) This is not what should be done. Removing the sentence also removes any record of what the proposed cost of the bike park will be to Hayes Township residents and taxpayers.

Could we have a little more attention to detail in the minutes, please? Take the time to get dates and names right. If you don’t know, ask, for crying out loud. More specific details on some of the agenda items mentioned would be nice. To date, the minutes are usually cursory and vague. Not much help to anyone looking up events that may or may not have been mentioned, but definitely occurred. Important information and events that occur at the meetings are often glossed over. We have to keep our own minutes in order to have a complete and accurate account of what took place.

Regarding the Special Meeting convened for the purpose of approving the budget, I understand that according to state law, special meetings may be called with a minimum of 18 hours’ notice. It should not be done often, only when absolutely necessary, but I can cite several meetings, including this one, called on short notice in Hayes Township in the past several years.  When at all possible, business that can wait until the next regular meeting should wait until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Some of those special meetings could have waited the couple of weeks until the next regularly scheduled meeting.  The budget should be ready at least by the time the notice is posted in the newspaper.

Having said that, I realize that because the budget was not ready as advertised, a special meeting had to be convened and it was, at the last possible moment. In doing this and scheduling it for 10 AM, it was pretty much guaranteed to have minimal public participation. Having observed the way Hayes Township does business, there’s a better than fifty percent chance that this was by design. They held a public hearing that wasn’t, and then they passed the budget in a short notice, last minute meeting held when the fewest people were likely to attend. Indeed, I know of people who would have been there, but they could not attend on such short notice due to prior commitments. Two members of the Board were absent, no doubt because of their day jobs. But the budget was passed, along with amendments. Just in the nick of time.

Also recorded in the minutes was an item that should never have been discussed, as it was not on the agenda. Mr. Breese was out of order and should have been told to save his information about his meeting with the Risk Management Advisor for the Township’s insurance for the next regularly scheduled Board of Trustees Meeting, and not this Special Budget Meeting.

Since Mr. Breese was allowed to discuss his meeting and the potential for bike and walking trails at Fir Road, it should also have been mentioned in the minutes that the discussion also turned to Don Atkinson’s (Planning Commission) ongoing conflicts of interest and a lack of confidence on the part of the members of the public who were present in John Scherrer’s leadership as Supervisor.

In case the general public is unaware of it, Mr. Atkinson’s ulterior motive in pushing for and backing the bike trails/park is so Hayes Township can send some business his son’s way. His son Todd owns B Extreme Cycle and he designs bike courses. That is a clear conflict of interest. The Budget Special Meeting was neither the time nor the place for it.

This is yet one more example of what takes place at Hayes Township when the officials think no one is paying attention.

People are paying attention, and we will bring it to everyone’s attention. All we ask is for our elected and appointed officials to conduct their business in a timely, proper and above board manner.

I don’t think it’s too much to ask from our public servants. We don’t work for them. They work for us.

Why Don Atkinson Should Recuse Himself

Don Atkinson should recuse himself from the voting on Doug Longenecker's latest Application for Special Use when it comes before the Planning Commission.

Here are all the reasons why it is inappropriate for Mr. Atkinson to vote on anything pertaining to Michigan Moto Mania:

1.  He is a resident of Mostetler Road.

2.  His niece (by marriage), Kari Garber of Harrison Realty is the realtor who showed Doug Longenecker the Gamble property on Mostetler Road.  The sale of the Gamble property was contingent upon Hayes Township's approval of Mr. Longenecker's request for Special Use.  Mr. Atkinson made the motion to approve the Special Use at the 21 Oct 2009 meeting.  The Special Use was approved, unbeknownst to the neighboring property owners.  Mr. Longenecker purchased the Gamble property on Mostetler Road as a result of the approval. 

3.  Mr. Atkinson signed a petition sponsored by the Mostetler Road and Deer Lake neighbors opposing the development of Michigan Moto Mania on the Gamble-Longenecker Property.

4.  He stated at the 16 March 2010 Hayes Township Board of Trustees meeting that he was against  the development of Michigan Moto Mania on the Gamble-Longenecker property on Mostetler Road.

5.  His son, Todd Atkinson, was helping Mr. Longenecker to design a BMX/Skateboard area on area of the Michigan Moto Mania property set aside for that purpose in Late Jun, and July of 2010.

6.  On Friday, 27 Aug 2010, Mr. Longenecker's vehicle was seen by many of the residents of Mostetler Road parked at Mr. Atkinson's house.  This constitutes Ex Parte Contact between Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Longenecker.  This contact between Mr. Longenecker and Mr. Atkinson took place three days before a Polaris sponsored event took place on the Michigan Moto Mania Property.

7.  Mr. Atkinson participated in the Polaris sponsored event, Way Out Training Tour (WOTT), that took place on the Michigan Moto Mania property on 30 Aug 2010.  This event was deemed by Judge Mienk to be a violation of the stay that was on the property at the time due to the Mostetler Road/Deer Lake neighbors' appeal of the Special Use to the Hayes Township Zoning Board Of Appeals. 

According to the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Atkinson's participation in the event was a misdemeanor, which to date has gone uncited by any authority in Hayes Township.

8.  Mr. Atkinson was seen by residents of Mostetler Road taking firewood from the Michigan Moto Mania property for his personal use.

The improprieties clearly color Mr. Atkinson's opinion on anything related to Michigan Moto Mania and preclude him from making an unbiased decision.